"atlas shrugged" will change the face of american politics

[MaggieMae]

"Libberish" = those who to be thought of as conservative or libertarian, thus libberish. Very good, guys.

Nope jake
But we have no way of communicating with them. They speak in a totally different language, known as "libberish". I have cracked the code and have provided a service in translating bits and pieces of their language so that someday, we'll be able to discuss and debate with them. Or maybe they'll just still call conservatives "Nazis". Who knows? But keep in mind, I'm trying to help break the language barrier here.

Liberal to English Dictionary

I find Conservaspeak on Message Boards as generally not actually addressing the issue at all. Rather ~~

-- "Oh no, I'm not a Republican! I'm an Independent" (libertarian, crossover voter, conservative etc.) Surest sign of a typical Republican too ashamed to admit party affiliation.

-- Sock puppets so the poster can friend him/herself or send two or more responses to their own posts.

-- "You're making ad hominem attacks!!" But it's okay if I do.

-- Emphasis on social value concepts (aka wedge issues) at the expense of serious matters or to deflect attention when the real debate is lost.

-- Even worse, glomming on to some verbal faux pas as if it dramatically changed the crux of the issue.

If I really thought about it, I could fill several pages.

 

[Big Fitz]

Your question is rhetorical, and irrelevant to the discussion.

If you wish to dispute that the Constitution can be amended by a super majority, thus proving that ultimately, the majority rules in this country, then do so.

Good luck.

My question is dead on your statement not so much

How many do we need to have had to prove that the Constitution can be amended?

A Constitutional amendment is just like a wind you know it there but you can't see it.

You mean the First Amendment granting free speech is just bullshit?

Actually, the first amendment does not grant free speech. It PROTECTS our God Given Right to free speech. Of course there are some basic limits to it as well.

You can't spread falsehoods about (Libel and Slander are not protected)
You can't threaten public safety (Shouting fire in a crowded theater if none exists)

I keep thinking there is a third limitation, but I can never remember it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ayn Rand's view of Ronald Reagan:

In 1976, as Burns reports, she urged readers to oppose his campaign for president. "I urge you, as emphatically as I can, not to support the candidacy of Ronald Reagan," she wrote, calling him a conservative in "the worst sense of the word," because he backed a mixed economy and opposed abortion rights.

hmmm...

Ed Kilgore for Democracy Journal: In Galt They Trust

 

[Big Fitz]

Apparently the film is being released in multiple installments. I hope that one movie will be dedicated entirely to the 70-page John Galt speech so the film series can be just as pontifical and prolix as the novel.

Tell me, do you feel the same way about the following works:

Fahrenheit 451
Brave New World
1984
A Handmaid's Tale
Soylant Green
Planet of the Apes
A Clockwork Orange
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
War of the Worlds
The Day The Earth Stood Still
Logan's Run
Metropolis
Demolition Man
The Dark Knight
Blade Runner
Avatar
The Day After Tomorrow
Minority Report

IIRC there are film versions of all these works. All of them have a basic political agenda behind them in various forms of camouflage.

If you haven't seen these films, you should find them. Some are very good (Blade Runner, Demolition Man, The Dark Knight), others are pretty lousy (A Handmaid's Tale, The Day After Tomorrow, Soylant Green), but all are interesting in how they express political philosophy and illustrate it in science fiction for mass consumption. Shit, why, for instance is money never part of Star Trek? Why is everyone working? Has culture hit some eudamonic phase of life? Hard to believe really and part of why I have a hard time enjoying the universe very much.

BTW, I view Atlas Shrugged as a Science Fiction work because of some small aspects of the technological devices in it, the time isn't defined well, plus the style of writing was reminiscent of classical science fiction in many ways.

 

[washamericom]

Many right wing christians would say that. I didn't.

So you speak for christians now?

It's well known that many rightwing christians assert that the U.S. is a Christian nation.

the u.s. is a christian nation... it's like ninety something percent.
i was waiting for someone to mention "new world order". not the rule of the jungle.

 

[MaggieMae]

My question is dead on your statement not so much


A Constitutional amendment is just like a wind you know it there but you can't see it.

You mean the First Amendment granting free speech is just bullshit?

The original question since you want to take what I said out of context is,
How many amendment have we had in the last 80 years?

You didn't write that? Every "amendment" can be seen, all 27 of them, and are applied as a matter of law. Maybe you should have said "A PROPOSED Constitutional Amendment is just like a wind..." Although that's hardly true either. The next amendment, if and when it happens, will cover several ambiguous clauses found in the original Constitution and will be done for clarity. But the debate will be enormous, hardly invisible.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So you speak for christians now?

It's well known that many rightwing christians assert that the U.S. is a Christian nation.

the u.s. is a christian nation... it's like ninety something percent.
i was waiting for someone to mention "new world order". not the rule of the jungle.

Ayn Rand believed in the law of the jungle being supreme.

btw, % of Christians is not what those people mean when they call this a Christian nation.

 

[MaggieMae]

The guy was a LEFTIST...dumbass. And I say WAS because he's done. /Story.

He visited conspiracy theory sites and believed in a New World Order coming to town, a conspiracy theory that's been around for decades, but recently revised and piqued the interest of unread idiots when Democrats gained control and especially since Obama became president. How is that "leftist"????

The New World Order is not a conspiracy Bush SR. has mentioned it a few times. The U.N. will be the means that will make it happen. The concept will be played like this to stop war the world must be unified and have one world law, with one leadership head. Why do you think the U.S. government is tring to destory the dollar?

The "New World Order" as envisioned by the current batch of loons can be found in Glenn Beck's bullshit. A Caliphate is a comin' soon to America (AND THE WORLD!!!), supported by the monied interests of George Soros and evil Communists posing as Washington liberal elites in partnership with the nasty physical destruction capabilities of Islamic terror organizations. A secret NWO is being established as we speak.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You mean the First Amendment granting free speech is just bullshit?

The original question since you want to take what I said out of context is,
How many amendment have we had in the last 80 years?

None. How does that prove that the United States is not a representative democracy, which, in case anyone missed it or forgot it,

is the point of this conversation.

bigreb claims that the US is not a representative democracy. He is clearly wrong, but, in the grand tradition of modern conservatism, is too obstinate and brainwashed to admit it.

None.

And you would be wrong
we have had 7
Even though some amendments were Ratified within two too three years time some like the 17th was still being voted on up to Delaware Jun 25, 2010
proposed on May 13, 1912.
Ratified Connecticut Apr 8, 1913

The 27th Amendment, which restricts raises in congressional pay, was proposed on September 25, 1789.

Ratified New Jersey May 7, 1992

Some states did not vote on some amendments some flat out rejected them.
Ratification of Constitutional Amendments - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
The moral of the story is, it's hard to radify an amendment than it is for a drunk to go to church on sunday morning.

 

[washamericom]

one reason not that many people distance themselves from jake the flake, is they think he know's, but he really doesn't have a working knowledge of the subject (much like our president). you can't just stand on the shoulder's of those who have done the work (jurrasic park).





Quote: Originally Posted by choice
it's so great that people like fitz and boedicca and political chic now rule the USMB

 

[bigrebnc1775]

He visited conspiracy theory sites and believed in a New World Order coming to town, a conspiracy theory that's been around for decades, but recently revised and piqued the interest of unread idiots when Democrats gained control and especially since Obama became president. How is that "leftist"????

The New World Order is not a conspiracy Bush SR. has mentioned it a few times. The U.N. will be the means that will make it happen. The concept will be played like this to stop war the world must be unified and have one world law, with one leadership head. Why do you think the U.S. government is tring to destory the dollar?

The "New World Order" as envisioned by the current batch of loons can be found in Glenn Beck's bullshit. A Caliphate is a comin' soon to America (AND THE WORLD!!!), supported by the monied interests of George Soros and evil Communists posing as Washington liberal elites in partnership with the nasty physical destruction capabilities of Islamic terror organizations. A secret NWO is being established as we speak.

Which came first George Bush SR or Glenn Beck?

 

[MaggieMae]

It's well known that many rightwing christians assert that the U.S. is a Christian nation.

And what does that have to do with Ayn Rand? Christians aren't as judgemental as you think, at least those people who truely are Christians.

What about Conservative Christians who want to amend the Constitution to effectively ban all abortion?

Or Christians who want to destroy all liberals, either by force or by starving the beast? As for banning all abortions, as soon as some hardline pro-life person comes up with a plan for taking care of unwanted children after they're born, a heavy additional cost to those same taxpayers who revolt over providing welfare, then I'll start paying more attention to that issue.

 

[washamericom]

He visited conspiracy theory sites and believed in a New World Order coming to town, a conspiracy theory that's been around for decades, but recently revised and piqued the interest of unread idiots when Democrats gained control and especially since Obama became president. How is that "leftist"????

The New World Order is not a conspiracy Bush SR. has mentioned it a few times. The U.N. will be the means that will make it happen. The concept will be played like this to stop war the world must be unified and have one world law, with one leadership head. Why do you think the U.S. government is tring to destory the dollar?

The "New World Order" as envisioned by the current batch of loons can be found in Glenn Beck's bullshit. A Caliphate is a comin' soon to America (AND THE WORLD!!!), supported by the monied interests of George Soros and evil Communists posing as Washington liberal elites in partnership with the nasty physical destruction capabilities of Islamic terror organizations. A secret NWO is being established as we speak.

in a basement in new haven ct.

 

[MaggieMae]

*I* Gave up nothing. Do you enjoy being a horse's ASS Jokey? or do you do this because you have such a lonely existance that this is the ONLY WAY people will talk to you? ARE YOU this patheitic?

Excuse me, but there are over 400 posts in this thread, and I see very few distancing themselves from Jake, nor anyone else who presents a credible argument against the theories of Ayn Rand.

I'm still waiting for them to present something credible, care to make a suggestion?

You seem to have an inordinate amount of time to spend on a message board, so why don't you go back through them all and see for yourself? Obviously, you didn't bother to read anything I said previously, so I'm not about to go searching for you. It could be, like any good con, you ignore any thoughtful conversation because you're far more interested in liberal bashing which must give you some sense of faux power.

 

[MaggieMae]

First end duplication of effort. Second, start cutting redirect funds into efforts to ween them off the dole, mostly by adding work requirements to even receive government money. Then, slowly start cutting roles AND department size simultaneously.

The second part is the hard one. Getting government to work towards it's own obsolesence.

In the same time, provide small tax breaks to people who volunteer or donate money to PRIVATE charities of any type that do not receive government funds to cover those who are really in need due to disability or other very specific circumstance till private organizations come about.

The problem with eliminating dolists is to make poverty survivable but uncomfortable. Even benjamin Franklin pointed that out. So here's one extreme way.

You need housing? Fine. Don't expect an apartment. Here's a dorm room at a government Dorm you will be sharing it with another person, bathroom's down the hall. TV? Sure. Shared common room. Meals prison cafeteria style, hope you like what they cook, seconds are available. Manditory job training if you're not working. If you are working, you pay some rent. Children? They'll be attending a school in the day, and have their own dorms. Parents can visit them as needed. No booze, no cigarettes, no drugs. Internet is in the public room by appointment.

It's somewhat degrading, I agree. Humiliating to live in such a circumstance, but That is the point. They are fed, clothed, sheltered and offered a little bit of privacy, and they will get job training if needed, or put into a work program. No lingering about during the day waiting for meals. You want them motivated to leave it as soon as possible and getting their own life, home and ability to stand on their own.

And like I said... this is one extreme example, that 150 years ago, actually would have been quite common in places like England after the poverty laws and Metropolitan Police force, and Peeler reforms kicked in. A modern Dickensian aspect I guess and that could only be countered by tight regulation of the system... and even better still if you have it contracted out to private management companies that have performance based incentives to run a good facility.

Just thinking outside the box.

I actually agree with some of your input. I just wish you would stop aligning yourself with the loons. I might actually get to like you on an intellectual level.

LOL... thanks I think? But sorry, I still remain staunchly anti-collectivism, pro-individual, pro-personal responsibility, pro-small government, pro-privatization and a constitutional originalist.

I'm surprised we agree on this issue for the most part.

You shouldn't be surprised. I agree in principle on all of that, but we (along with others who actually can THINK) simply disagree on how to get there from here.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You mean the First Amendment granting free speech is just bullshit?

The original question since you want to take what I said out of context is,
How many amendment have we had in the last 80 years?

You didn't write that? Every "amendment" can be seen, all 27 of them, and are applied as a matter of law. Maybe you should have said "A PROPOSED Constitutional Amendment is just like a wind..." Although that's hardly true either. The next amendment, if and when it happens, will cover several ambiguous clauses found in the original Constitution and will be done for clarity. But the debate will be enormous, hardly invisible.

the pharse like the wind you can't see it but you know it's there is a metaphor, you do know what a metapher is don't you? Sure you can view every Amendment there is, but that does not mean it's an easy process to ratify one.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Excuse me, but there are over 400 posts in this thread, and I see very few distancing themselves from Jake, nor anyone else who presents a credible argument against the theories of Ayn Rand.

I'm still waiting for them to present something credible, care to make a suggestion?

You seem to have an inordinate amount of time to spend on a message board, so why don't you go back through them all and see for yourself? Obviously, you didn't bother to read anything I said previously, so I'm not about to go searching for you. It could be, like any good con, you ignore any thoughtful conversation because you're far more interested in liberal bashing which must give you some sense of faux power.

No I don't have the time but you made the statement. Waiting on some suggestions.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ayn Rand's view of Ronald Reagan:

In 1976, as Burns reports, she urged readers to oppose his campaign for president. "I urge you, as emphatically as I can, not to support the candidacy of Ronald Reagan," she wrote, calling him a conservative in "the worst sense of the word," because he backed a mixed economy and opposed abortion rights.

hmmm...

Ed Kilgore for Democracy Journal: In Galt They Trust

From the about part in your link

The mission of Democracy is to build a vibrant and vital progressivism for the twenty-first century that builds on the movement’s proud history, is true to its central values, and is relevant to present times.

Democracy and progressivism two words that stand out. I call your source a load of bullshit.

 

[MaggieMae]

Invasion of the Body Snatchers had a political message in it? I haven't seen the newer version, but I've seen the original several times, and I don't recall any. I thought they were just the victims of an alien invasion.

[Currently, I'm trying to follow "The Event," which had somewhat of a political message to it last season, but there's been a plot twist this year, so I don't think it's going there. Looks like those "aliens" might not be aliens at all, but the people who once inhabited earth and were shipped to outer space for some reason years ago.]

I love science fiction, if it has a credible plot, and I'm not usually looking for a political message in any of it.

 

[Big Fitz]

He visited conspiracy theory sites and believed in a New World Order coming to town, a conspiracy theory that's been around for decades, but recently revised and piqued the interest of unread idiots when Democrats gained control and especially since Obama became president. How is that "leftist"????

The New World Order is not a conspiracy Bush SR. has mentioned it a few times. The U.N. will be the means that will make it happen. The concept will be played like this to stop war the world must be unified and have one world law, with one leadership head. Why do you think the U.S. government is tring to destory the dollar?

The "New World Order" as envisioned by the current batch of loons can be found in Glenn Beck's bullshit. A Caliphate is a comin' soon to America (AND THE WORLD!!!), supported by the monied interests of George Soros and evil Communists posing as Washington liberal elites in partnership with the nasty physical destruction capabilities of Islamic terror organizations. A secret NWO is being established as we speak.

What's the one issue liberals and radical muslims agree on?

Hatred for the Jew and the west. Strange bedfellows indeed.